What will be the 2017 greatest weakness for the Sox?

[mvp 78]

I know a lot of people are pretty excited for what 2017 has in store, but are there any dark clouds looming?

[Spudboy]

Expensive water downed beer at Fenway.

[Spudboy]

I think the pen is not completely defined and constructed. I'm not sure who will be in it.

 

I am not saying that they will suck but I just don't know how much of a strength it it without knowing who all the players are.

[Bellhorn04]

Loss of Papi.

[Emp9]

Expensive water downed beer at Fenway.

 

They don't have the Guinness & Sam Adams kiosks any more?

[moonslav59]

Kind of surprised not to see 3B listed as a choice. I'd put that second to the pen.

 

As for losing depth due to trading prospects, I think the only prospect traded that had any 2017 depth value was Moncada.

[User Name]

Bullpen. DD's giant white whale.

[mvp 78]

Kind of surprised not to see 3B listed as a choice. I'd put that second to the pen.

 

As for losing depth due to trading prospects, I think the only prospect traded that had any 2017 depth value was Moncada.

 

It's there, it's called "other."

[moonslav59]

It's there, it's called "other."

 

Yeah, but I figured 3B is a major weak area- at least top 3, so I expected it to be listed among the 7 listed (not counting "other").

 

No biggie- I voted for the pen.

[Kimmi]

I say none of the above.

 

IMO, the 2017 team really doesn't have an area of weakness, unless we are hit fairly hard by the injury bug. In which case, I guess I would have to say that overall depth would be a weakness, but that's pretty much the case with any team that is hit hard by injuries.

[Dojji]

I voted other, though my issue is tangentially related to Ortiz' departure.

 

Do you realize we just lost our last 2004 guy? The wealth of postseason experience that man has is now lost to the field team. I think Pedroia and Bogaerts are the only 2 players we have with direct World Series experience, and Bogaerts was a rookie at the time and he barely counts.

 

What I'm saying is this team is going to have issues figuring out its identity in a way our teams haven't in a long time. The loss of Ortiz is part of that but the bigger issue is the final loss of identity from the Epstein-era core. It's going to be up to the coaching and the new core to reforge a new identity, and it may or may not happen, we'll see.

 

If they can establish an identity and an esprit du corps, I have no other doubts that this team is geared for a deep playoff run. I'm gonna need to see if Farrell, who won in 2013 with a strong existing core and managed the Blue Jays and their strong existing core, can build an actual team out of the pieces he's given. This will be the first time he's had to do it, and with the huge investment we made on the 2017 roster, the stakes couldn't be higher.

[moonslav59]

I voted other, though my issue is tangentially related to Ortiz' departure.

 

And, Pedey is the only guy from 2007.

 

We only have 5 guys on our current 40 man roster who were on the 40 man roster at the start of the 2013 championship team:

 

2013

Pedey

Wright (no ML gams)

Vazquez (no ML games)

Holt (played in 26 games)

JBJ (no Ml games)

(Workman and Bogey were added during the 2013 season, and Bogey played 18 gms late in the season)

[mvp 78]

I voted other, though my issue is tangentially related to Ortiz' departure.

 

Do you realize we just lost our last 2004 guy? The wealth of postseason experience that man has is now lost to the field team. I think Pedroia and Bogaerts are the only 2 players we have with direct World Series experience, and Bogaerts was a rookie at the time and he barely counts.

 

What I'm saying is this team is going to have issues figuring out its identity in a way our teams haven't in a long time. The loss of Ortiz is part of that but the bigger issue is the final loss of identity from the Epstein-era core. It's going to be up to the coaching and the new core to reforge a new identity, and it may or may not happen, we'll see.

 

If they can establish an identity and an esprit du corps, I have no other doubts that this team is geared for a deep playoff run. I'm gonna need to see if Farrell, who won in 2013 with a strong existing core and managed the Blue Jays and their strong existing core, can build an actual team out of the pieces he's given. This will be the first time he's had to do it, and with the huge investment we made on the 2017 roster, the stakes couldn't be higher.

 

Price pitched in the World Series. Joe Kelly pitched in the World Series. Rick Porcello pitched in the World Series. Pablo Sandoval has played in multiple World Series and won the series mvp. Mitch Moreland has played in 2 World Series.

[notin]

Am I the only one who never understood that whole "needs to figure out an identity" thing? I don't mean to single out Dojii here; I hear that line all the time every year in the media about one team or another.

 

What is a "team identity"? Why is it essential? In a game that us largely composed of cumulative individual efforts as opposed to synchronized team play, I find it confusing. Will players on a team that hasn't figured out their identity hit worse or pitch worse? Is a team identity like "team chemistry", in that you can argue that teams that play better establish their identity as opposed to teams need an identity to play better?

[moonslav59]

Am I the only one who never understood that whole "needs to figure out an identity" thing? I don't mean to single out Dojii here; I hear that line all the time every year in the media about one team or another.

 

What is a "team identity"? Why is it essential? In a game that us largely composed of cumulative individual efforts as opposed to synchronized team play, I find it confusing. Will players on a team that hasn't figured out their identity hit worse or pitch worse? Is a team identity like "team chemistry", in that you can argue that teams that play better establish their identity as opposed to teams need an identity to play better?

 

I tend to agree. I remember the year Reggie Jackson went after Billy Martin in the dugout. I thought to myself, "No way the Yankess can win now!". Ooops!

 

Baseball more than any other "team sport" is mostly about individual effort. Pitcher vs batter, Batter vs fielder, fielder vs runner... Only things like DP's and relay throws involve any advanced teamwork efforts.

 

I have come to believe that "team chemistry" matters more than I used to think it did, but the talk about "identity" does seem a little overboard.

[notin]

Price pitched in the World Series. Joe Kelly pitched in the World Series. Rick Porcello pitched in the World Series. Pablo Sandoval has played in multiple World Series and won the series mvp. Mitch Moreland has played in 2 World Series.

 

Brandon Workman also pitched in the 2013 World Series. ..

[notin]

I tend to agree. I remember the year Reggie Jackson went after Billy Martin in the dugout. I thought to myself, "No way the Yankess can win now!". Ooops!

 

Baseball more than any other "team sport" is mostly about individual effort. Pitcher vs batter, Batter vs fielder, fielder vs runner... Only things like DP's and relay throws involve any advanced teamwork efforts.

 

I have come to believe that "team chemistry" matters more than I used to think it did, but the talk about "identity" does seem a little overboard.

 

I think the importance of both team chemistry and team identity are overblown in a 24 hour sports media desperate to find new topics of discussion. ...

[moonslav59]

I think the importance of both team chemistry and team identity are overblown in a 24 hour sports media desperate to find new topics of discussion. ...

 

The thing that gets me is this: a guy like Josh Beckett was on his way to becoming one of baseball's all time great post season starters. He almost single-handedly carried the Marlins to a ring and was lights out for us in 2007. Suddenly, he becomes a poison in the clubhouse and is labelled "bad chemistry".

[S5Dewey]

IMO those two things - chemistry and identity - are very closely related but aren't the same thing.

 

Identity is the motivation and the mission. Teams like the Yankees and the Cowboys had an "Us against the world" mentality. Nobody liked them and they knew it, and they fed off it. They put out a little bit extra just to prove everyone else wrong.

Then we come to the 2013 Red Sox. I believe they felt it was part of their mission that year to assuage part of the damage done by the bombing and they 'dug a little deeper' to make it happen. Every time they looked at the 617 jersey in the dugout they were reminded of what their mission was that year.

 

Chemistry is the bonding, the need to perform well not only for themselves but for the good of the team. Nothing builds good chemistry like success just as nothing breeds poor chemistry like losing.

 

The two are related because when a team truly feels a common goal it builds chemistry. When a team that believes in the mission starts to win the chemistry follows and so ad infinitum.

 

I know the stat geeks are going to pooh-pooh this, and I don't mind.

[notin]

The thing that gets me is this: a guy like Josh Beckett was on his way to becoming one of baseball's all time great post season starters. He almost single-handedly carried the Marlins to a ring and was lights out for us in 2007. Suddenly, he becomes a poison in the clubhouse and is labelled "bad chemistry".

 

His "bad chemistry" remarkably coincided with his deteriorating ability to pitch. What a coincidence. The notorious "chicken and beer" scandal was promoted as proof of his sudden change in attitude and priority, and his impact on team chemistry. But, at least according to AJ Pierzynski, that type of behavior was practically universal in MLB...

[Eddy Ballgame]

His "bad chemistry" remarkably coincided with his deteriorating ability to pitch. What a coincidence. The notorious "chicken and beer" scandal was promoted as proof of his sudden change in attitude and priority, and his impact on team chemistry. But, at least according to AJ Pierzynski, that type of behavior was practically universal in MLB...

 

Beckett has always been a bit of an arrogant dick, something that is usually tolerated by teams when a guy is performing at a top level. I think Beckett actually fed off of it during his career. If it weren't for the Dodgers trade, they were supposedly going to eat his contract if they couldn't trade him after 2012. They clearly had enough, especially after the "FU" game when he went out and threw batting practice against Texas when he didn't want to pitch.

 

The importance of team chemistry or whatever you want to call it in baseball can be debated all day long, but you can't completely dismiss it when Cherington said after the 2012 season that the first thing he knew he needed to do was "Change the culture of the clubhouse." The Dodger trade was a great start being able to get rid of 3 guys who didn't want to be here, and it's obvious that he brought in a bunch of gamers and well respected, well-liked guys that off-season.

[S5Dewey]

Beckett has always been a bit of an arrogant dick, something that is usually tolerated by teams when a guy is performing at a top level. I think Beckett actually fed off of it during his career. If it weren't for the Dodgers trade, they were supposedly going to eat his contract if they couldn't trade him after 2012. They clearly had enough, especially after the "FU" game when he went out and threw batting practice against Texas when he didn't want to pitch.

 

The importance of team chemistry or whatever you want to call it in baseball can be debated all day long, but you can't completely dismiss it when Cherington said after the 2012 season that the first thing he knew he needed to do was "Change the culture of the clubhouse." The Dodger trade was a great start being able to get rid of 3 guys who didn't want to be here, and it's obvious that he brought in a bunch of gamers and well respected, well-liked guys that off-season.

 

I agree that Beckett was always a dick, and it worked well when it worked in our favor. I can remember watching him take the mound with the obvious attitude of "If you're going to win this game you've got to go through ME, Mo Fu". When he took the mound on those days he was a true leader on the field.

 

Unfortunately when the tide turned and he became unhappy in Boston he turned that same dickish attitude against the Sox and the FO and, ever the leader, he had others follow him.

 

Guys like Beckett are dangerous. They can be your best friend and then become your worst enemy in a heartbeat.

[Eddy Ballgame]

I agree that Beckett was always a dick, and it worked well when it worked in our favor. I can remember watching him take the mound with the obvious attitude of "If you're going to win this game you've got to go through ME, Mo Fu". When he took the mound on those days he was a true leader on the field.

 

Unfortunately when the tide turned and he became unhappy in Boston he turned that same dickish attitude against the Sox and the FO and, ever the leader, he had others follow him.

 

Guys like Beckett are dangerous. They can be your best friend and then become your worst enemy in a heartbeat.

 

Agreed. Look at Manny Ramirez. He became unbearable. Tito Francona called him a "despicable human being" in his book. 23 out of 24 teammates voted that he should be traded before they shipped him to LA.

[jacksonianmarch]

Playoff chokers in your rotation are all I can come up with. Unless your entire team gets Ebola, you're winning the east

[Bellhorn04]

"Chemistry" and "identity" are shaky concepts to be sure. I believe that there are real psychological factors like motivation and confidence, but trying to measure any of it is voodoo science.

[jacksonianmarch]

And your offense will slip a bit with Papi gone.

[moonslav59]

And your offense will slip a bit with Papi gone.

 

I agree, and it's not just about his numbers needing to be replaced.

 

It might be a lot to ask for Betts to get even better, but it is certainly possible. Bogey can improve, JBJ can get more consistent and Young could stay healthy all year and give us some gains.

 

I'm hopeful we can see some significant offensive improvement from our 3B and LF positions.

 

2016 3B

.242 15 68 (.306/.380/.686)

 

2016 LF

.268 14 70 (.337/.423/.759)

 

Last year we got 73 HRs and 257 RBIs from our 1B/DH slots combined (~.926 OPS). If HanRam can repeat his .866 for half of the PAs from those two slots, we'll need an .806 OPS from the Moreland-Young platoon to bring us close within 90 points of .926.

 

Career:

vs RHPs: .778 Moreland

vs LHPs: .846 Young (.999 in 2016 and .972 in 2015)

 

I realize it is not as simple as this, but if we can lose only 90 points from 1B/DH and gain 90+ points from 3B/LF, we could end up scoring about the same amount of runs as 2016. That may be wishful thinking, but it is not unreasonable to think it could happen.

 

Yes, we could also see some regressions at other positions. Pedey had his best season in 5 years. He may not repeat. Leon will likely decline, but our catcher OPS was .665. Remember, Hannigan and Holaday and their combined .450 OPS in 145 PAs are gone. JBJ and Bogey are hard to project. HanRam could decline; he's been up and down a lot over his career.

 

I'm hopeful our offense will score within 30 runs of 2016.

Edited January 25, 2017 by moonslav59

[S5Dewey]

I agree, and it's not just about his numbers needing to be replaced.

 

It might be a lot to ask for Betts to get even better, but it is certainly possible. Bogey can improve, JBJ can get more consistent and Young could stay healthy all year and give us some gains.

 

I'm hopeful we can see some significant offensive improvement from our 3B and LF positions.

 

2016 3B

.242 15 68 (.306/.380/.686)

 

2016 LF

.268 14 70 (.337/.423/.759)

 

Last year we got 73 HRs and 157 RBIs from our 1B/DH slots combined (~.926 OPS). If HanRam can repeat his .866 for half of the PAs from those two slots, we'll need an .806 OPS from the Moreland-Young platoon to bring us close within 90 points of .926.

 

Career:

vs RHPs: .778 Moreland

vs LHPs: .846 Young (.999 in 2016 and .972 in 2015)

 

I realize it is not as simple as this, but if we can lose only 90 points from 1B/DH and gain 90+ points from 3B/LF, we could end up scoring about the same amount of runs as 2016. That may be wishful thinking, but it is not unreasonable to think it could happen.

 

Yes, we could also see some regressions at other positions. Pedey had his best season in 5 years. He may not repeat. Leon will likely decline, but our catcher OPS was .665. Remember, Hannigan and Holaday and their combined .450 OPS in 145 PAs are gone. JBJ and Bogey are hard to project. HanRam could decline; he's been up and down a lot over his career.

 

I'm hopeful our offense will score within 30 runs of 2016.

 

If we can score within 50 runs of last year and everyone else scores the same we'll still be 50 runs better than anyone else. We'll be ok with that, especially with our pitching staff.

[moonslav59]

If we can score within 50 runs of last year and everyone else scores the same we'll still be 50 runs better than anyone else. We'll be ok with that, especially with our pitching staff.

 

We need to score 50 runs better than others just to break even with the home park adjustment, but I agree. If we can be about 50 ahead, our pitching and defense should carry us to a top 4 team in MLB.

[notin]

Beckett has always been a bit of an arrogant dick, something that is usually tolerated by teams when a guy is performing at a top level. I think Beckett actually fed off of it during his career. If it weren't for the Dodgers trade, they were supposedly going to eat his contract if they couldn't trade him after 2012. They clearly had enough, especially after the "FU" game when he went out and threw batting practice against Texas when he didn't want to pitch.

 

The importance of team chemistry or whatever you want to call it in baseball can be debated all day long, but you can't completely dismiss it when Cherington said after the 2012 season that the first thing he knew he needed to do was "Change the culture of the clubhouse." The Dodger trade was a great start being able to get rid of 3 guys who didn't want to be here, and it's obvious that he brought in a bunch of gamers and well respected, well-liked guys that off-season.

 

But one way of looking at"change the culture of the clubhouse" is that it means "bring in new players. " Is it about culture or baseball ability? Getting rid of Beckett and company might have involved guys who didn't want to be in Boston, but the underlying truth is also that Beckett and especially Crawford sucked. It's not like the Sox even got much for them. The long view of that deal is the Sox got Carson Smith and his 2IP.

 

But losing them also allowed for a really good down payment for Uehara, Victorino, Napoli, Drew, and Dempster. Better players? New culture? Which was more important?

 

And Dempster's off field contributions get much more praise than his oft-ignored on-field performance. While not great, he was a step up over what was left of Beckett, and was probably one of the better back of the rotation starters in the AL.

 

I doubt any team ever assembled had 25 guys who all liked each other. There are plenty of stories about the Oakland A's and their ubiquitous loathing of each other. It didn't stop them from winning three straight titles.

 

I just doubt how much all of our perception of camaraderie matters, especially among teams with enough talent and few weaknesses. Health is a much bigger deal to me....